I saw the survey numbers and they read 55-45 for Stupid Rosselló...
I saw the primary numbers and they read 60-40 for "Jellyfish Lite" Fortuño.
I was way wrong. And yet, the end result is still a wash for Us.
First, did I mention I was wrong? In a case of "Arriving at a conclusion before all the facts are in," or "Thinking your information is better than other information", My use of a specific survey to analyze the then-pending primary led Me astray. My bad, but this same person had produced three prior surveys that were marvels of accuracy, flying in the face of "established" polls with high-powered backing. I felt I was on solid ground; turns out I was on quicksand.
Instead of challenging My survey-based conclusions, I found reasons why My conclusion should stand. "Selective" thinking may be a requirement when information is abundant (part of My daily tasks as a consultant), but it's a crapshoot when done with a scarcity of information. I rolled My dice with iffy rationale and I came up snake-eyes.
But then again, so did We. And unlike My faux pas, this crappy outcome was ordained, for no matter who won the statehood (hahahanever) party gubernatorial primary, We would still be faced with a faux choice between a dud and a dud. Makes Me shake My head and mutter "Duh."
Or maybe "Doh!"
The Jenius Has Spoken.